O ideal é ser científico, acadêmico e crítico

Michael Buckland, pesquisador da Ciência da Informação, propõe três critérios de rigor para a construção do conhecimento: é preciso ser científico, acadêmico e crítico — todas essas capacidades de acordo com as definições estritas que ele provê:

Although the word science is sometimes used broadly for any body of knowledge (e.g., domestic science, library science), here we are using it in the normative sense as denoting formal and physical sciences (e.g., chemistry, mathematics, and physics). Science is a constructive enterprise. Being scientific involves model-building. Hypotheses and theories are developed to explain and to predict observable phenomena. To be scholarly involves more than being knowledgeable. It requires the affirmative search for evidence contrary to one’s theories. This is true for all fields: in the humanities, the social sciences, the sciences, and professional practices. In this context, being critical is not a matter of being hostile or negative, but of asking questions about underlying assumptions and methodological choices. How have conclusions been determined, or at least influenced, by particular assumptions or the choice of method? The ideal is to be scientific and scholarly and critical. The more we can approach that ideal the more robust our ideas will be.

O excerto é parte do artigo “What kind of science can Information Science be?“.

[Tradução do trecho em andamento]

Comentários

Tão vazio aqui... deixe um comentário!

Deixe um comentário

O seu endereço de e-mail não será publicado. Campos obrigatórios são marcados com *

Barra lateral